"We do believe that such a request for a long period of time shows an amount of callousness towards the affected people at large", the bench said recently.
Madras High Court has criticised the Food Safety Standards Authority of India for seeking 18 months time for conducting scientific tests on the quality of sago produced in various factories. The First Bench Comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan, before which a batch of PIL’s seeking for scientific testing, in its order said “we fail to appreciate the stand which is now taken before us that the Food Safety Standards Authority of India needs 18 months more time to determine the tests, in view of the fact that the scientific panel has been re-constituted.
Setup Timeout Error: Setup took longer than 30 seconds to complete.
“We do believe that such a request for a long period of time shows an amount of callousness towards the affected people at large”, the bench said recently.
“Be that as it may, since the whole thing cannot be at a stand-still for 18 months, we direct the respondent to place before us as to in the interregnum period, what test has to be followed”, the bench said.
The matter relates to several petitions by stating that the Tamil Nadu Tapioca Natural Sago Manufacturers Association of Salem, who is predominant manufacturers and suppliers of sago in India, added acid and other chemicals in order to make it attractive.
Noting that it is harmful for health, they said consumers in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat had even stopped consumption because of high presence of chemicals.
It indirectly affected the interests of tapioca farmers, they submitted and sought an interim direction to the authorities to conduct the prescribed test by the authorities of Referral Food Laboratory, Pune.
When it was brought to the notice of the First Bench by the designated officer of the Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department present in Court that there were various criminal original petitions and writ petitions pending in respect of the action taken by the Department, the bench in its order said “we consider it appropriate to list all these matters before a single court, for which necessary administrative orders may be obtained from the Chief Justice.
The bench then listed the matter for further hearing to January 24, 2017.
No comments:
Post a Comment